Alvaro Graves wrote:
>
> Hi, my name is Alvaro Graves, I'm working on my MS in the University of
> Chile. My thesis consists in a RDF Representation of WordNet and to
> create some application over it.
>
> Currently I have parsed almost the entire wordnet 2.0 relations to RDF.
> The schema I created was based in one you had in
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/WNET/wordnet-sw-20040713.html
>
> I would appreciate a lot if you could check my schema and files of
> wordnet and give me your comments.
>
> The URI is http://www.dcc.uchile.cl/~agraves/wordnet/index.html
First of all: nice effort!
I'll have a closer look at it later, but I just noticed one thing
right off that you might want to change.
In your schema, you are defining the hyponym property with multiple
domains (VerbSynSet and NounSynSet). I think this is not really a good
idea: multiple domains/ranges are defined as an intersection in RDFS.
The result would therefore be that every concept that has a hyponym
property would be classified as _both_ a VerbSynSet and a NounSynSet.
Two easy solutions:
1. use a single domain that is the lowest common ancestor of the two
classes, for example 'SynSet'.
2. create domain-specific subproperties.
I tend to favor the first option because introducing a lot of
subproperties can clutter up your schema.
Jeen
--
Jeen Broekstra Aduna BV
Knowledge Engineer Julianaplein 14b, 3817 CS Amersfoort
http://aduna.biz The Netherlands
tel. +31 33 46599877